You bring up many questions and many topics, but in the end it is very easy to find out the responsible party for conducting the case study. Just contact the authors to see if they were paid to conduct the study, or if it was a case study completed by an independent analyst firm.
If I were the bank, I would want the market to know that we have upgraded to the latest in risk management technology to help us get through the crisis at hand.
If I were the tool vendor, I would publicize it even though the client is in difficult times. I think you mentioned they adopted it in August of 2008, which means it probably didn't launch until long after.
BTW, the same theory goes for Porsche right now, do you blame new tools they have brought in to manage their debt or business partners brought in to help them leverage or cash the options they hold on Volkswagen AG stock? Or do you blame the mistakes they made in taking on such debt and also not being transparent (Per the CEO of Volkswagen)?
The way I read it, it is clear that the focus here is on a product, on a bank and a particular way that business rules are used to help manage credit risk, instead of typical decisions, etc.
There is no economic theory in the study, or even analysis of HRE's financials. You are making a case study into a reason to degrade HRE, which you have a right to do, but in the context of the mistakes they made.
I'm sure this tool provider also has clients that are successful as well. So point your gun at the right target, instead of using a grenade to hit everyone involved.
Just my 2 cents...
karo